Pages

02 September 2009

It's so frustrating trying to troubleshoot problems and to provide solutions when we do not control changes, especially changes on top of changes. What typically happens when you allow changes on top of changes is that you do not give ample opportunity for discoveries that may need to be addressed. If more changes happen, then it adds a level of complexity to the troubleshooting process. Did the new change create the problem or did it simply provide a means of allowing the previous "flaws" to surface?

I think we all deal with change just fine, but I really hate being in reactive mode anymore. I prefer requirements, design review, code, test, beta rollout, feedback, fix package, test, document, train and implement. Is this realistic or impractical?

Total Pageviews

My Books

I checked out the audio book from the county library and I was surprised by the amount of entertainment this experience provided. The vulgarity promised in the book blurb presented itself nicely, and there was enough buggery and shagging...

I enjoyed this audio book during the last few weeks of driving to and from the office while alone in my car. There is something about this story which makes me feel good inside, and you can't quite put your finger on the source.
It's l...

The author unravels a chilling story, revealing little by little the redemption of a white man. Not only does the story evolve, but so does the protagonist's outlook in life as well as the white man's physical attributes while his true i...